Last Chance

I know, I used to own a software development company ... just me being a touch cynical.

@MikeTO, are your images linked or embedded?
John

I doubt you'll have any problems using Publisher for your needs, I'm creating an equally complex book in Publisher on an old MacBook and it's surprisingly fast. I have hundreds of photos in my book, too.

Is it possible that Serif are holding back this feature until v2.0 is ready? If so, then that is extremely pernicious.
Let me reiterate: implementing endnotes is not difficult. It's really just collating all the footnotes into a table, creating a space at the end of the chapter, or book, and plonking the table there. Simples. Footnotes are a little trickier as this requires creating space for each page and juggling the content to accommodate them, but it still is not rocket science.
The fact that the endnotes and/or footnotes do not even feature in a beta-test is dispiriting to say the least. That Serif cannot confirm one way or the other if/when it is appearing, equally so.
Given the amount of comments this feature alone has generated (90% uncomplimentary - being generous here) just shows the disappointment being experienced by users. I agree with previous comments: DTP without end/footnotes is not DTP.

Is it possible that Serif are holding back this feature until v2.0 is ready? If so, then that is extremely pernicious.
Let me reiterate: implementing endnotes is not difficult. It's really just collating all the footnotes into a table, creating a space at the end of the chapter, or book, and plonking the table there. Simples. Footnotes are a little trickier as this requires creating space for each page and juggling the content to accommodate them, but it still is not rocket science.
The fact that the endnotes and/or footnotes do not even feature in a beta-test is dispiriting to say the least. That Serif cannot confirm one way or the other if/when it is appearing, equally so.
Given the amount of comments this feature alone has generated (90% uncomplimentary - being generous here) just shows the disappointment being experienced by users. I agree with previous comments: DTP without end/footnotes is not DTP.

Is it possible that Serif are holding back this feature until v2.0 is ready? If so, then that is extremely pernicious.
Let me reiterate: implementing endnotes is not difficult. It's really just collating all the footnotes into a table, creating a space at the end of the chapter, or book, and plonking the table there. Simples. Footnotes are a little trickier as this requires creating space for each page and juggling the content to accommodate them, but it still is not rocket science.
The fact that the endnotes and/or footnotes do not even feature in a beta-test is dispiriting to say the least. That Serif cannot confirm one way or the other if/when it is appearing, equally so.
Given the amount of comments this feature alone has generated (90% uncomplimentary - being generous here) just shows the disappointment being experienced by users. I agree with previous comments: DTP without end/footnotes is not DTP.

Well said #MJWHM.
Helmar seems to overlook the very pertinent point that AP was, and still is, being promoted as a "professional" product. Foot/Endnotes are an essential part of a "professional" program. End of.

I cannot see to which particular 'lots' you are referring, but put that aside.
Your own post is perhaps the result of so-called flaming. You may wish, for example, to edit out the casual racism, which adds nothing to a reasoned discussion.
The suggestion that people should not be 'bitching here' (also unnecessarily abusive) perhaps fails to accept the fundamental logic of the forum concept. They exist precisely so that people can express their views and in a forum provided by a service supplier this is in order to allow that supplier to feel the needs of his/her users. Some may not feel the need to use such elements as footnotes and/or endnotes, but clearly others do. I am not 'bitching here' because I have nothing better to do with my time. I have been using Serif products for so long that I cannot find the earliest use - certainly well before 2007 .
I am concerned that a firm, for which I have had nothing but admiration hitherto, has released into the market functional but half-baked products. I could accept that if they were still clearly identified as beta products, and the products they are intended to replace were still made available and supported. Perhaps the necessary expertise has been lost.
I want Serif to be effective and receptive to the needs of its existing user base as well as moving onwards and upwards. I want to be able to use Affinity products with the ease that I use their predecessors but this is not yet possible. 
And as the title for this particular thread is specifically about Footnotes/Endnotes, this is the right (and intended) place to push for action, surely? It was May when I first joined in: around the same time we were assured "Serif are currently in the process of implementing this. It needs to be done carefully, not just thrown in, and we do always have the issue of programming resources." Seven months is quite a long wait. My immediate requirement is ended, but for others it is ongoing.
And that is not to mention the question of finding a way to import PagePlus files .... And no, importing PDFs is not the answer before anyone suggests it. But this is not the place for that discussion.

The jump to version 2 should include more significant changes rather than just addressing bugs and tweaking the code. I'm not expecting anything till then, but I'll be damned disappointed if it isn't included by v2.0.

The Text Frame studio panel has an option to "Ignore Text Wraps". Perhaps you have that set for the second frame?

I was trying to think of a scenario I would open a publisher file in AD or AP, but I couldn't think of one.
Evidently APub should be able to open/place AD an AP files. And it's great that the Designer and Photo personas are available in Publisher.

That quote from Affinity in Peter's post above is what has me worried. A killer feature for Affinity apps is that they are so interoperable across all apps and platforms, with the same file format for everything. I am just hoping that as we move into more Publisher-specific features like footnotes, data merge, etc, that this killer feature doesn't become the achilles' heel.

It's called forward planning.
My point is that I publish books and certain projects are nearing completion. So should I throw money at the Adobe solution (expensive and their support sucks - unlike Serif, I would like to point out), which means committing to a minimum monthly fee of £20, or £50 per month for the full Creative Cloud "experience".
I am plodding away quite happily with Affinity Publisher & Photo for the small magazines I'm committed to, but once the next book project kicks in then we are talking of at least six months development to get it print-ready (it's about 400pp and liberally illustrated). So I need to commit one way or the other quite soon, e.g. although Publisher will soon allow the importing of InDesign files, the same cannot be said for the reverse.
My own book will follow this and will probably be two volumes, 800pp; again liberally illustrated, so this isn't a light undertaking.
Don't get me wrong - I am impressed (stunned!) by what Publisher can offer for £50 and would quite happily pay double that for the features planned. It's the "not knowing" that make my buttocks clench 😉

Is it obvious? Remaining quiet and being patient is fine in a non-commercial world where deadlines do not exist, but it would be nice to be kept abreast of the actual progress and a possible timeline - we do need to know one way or the other. Do I switch back to InDesign or should I remain with Affinity?

Well, it always depends on certain used and processed software development factors and their implementation. Just a few factors here are planning, organisation, management and used dev workflow methods etc. Further it's also quite important what a specific software solution then is meant for, so whether tailor-made for a specific customer, or a globally distributed multilingual mass product, which also has to compete with other such products on the market.
For the later, the category in which the Affinity products fall, one must also meet the needs of the customers in time, otherwise you will lose them to the competition. Regardless of whether your product is cheaper or not, if it does not meet customer requirements, or lacks essential for customers important functionality, it is finally useless for them.

This is what baffles me. Affinity Publisher was released a year ago. I bought it right away. Now, a year later, I haven’t the slightest clue whether it is ever going to turn into the product I thought I was buying: a professional publishing software. Maybe it’s just me but the word ’professional’ indicates that footnote/endnote functionality is self-evident. 

Agreed @MJWHM and @NaulisJakke. For anyone involved with the serious end of publishing then foot/endnotes are absolutely essential. If you can create an index, then endnotes is simply an adaptation of that. A little more consideration from Serif would certainly not go amiss.

It is 18 months since this question was originally asked. The footnotes and endnotes were a feature of Pageplus and allowed me to publish several items, including one tome of nearly 600 pages. This is pretty fundamental stuff for publishing anything remotely academic. How much longer must we wait?

Not the most constructive reply, but possibly not intended to be. If it is possible to generate index entries, then it should be a simple procedure to generate some sort of cross-reference system, as it was in PP. If dominik is presumably content with something that is not suitable for serious book-publishing beyond simple chapter-headings and the like, will need to address this sort of question in a constructive and timely fashion AP is to break into that genre for those who want a more powerful product. AP was brought in in a blaze of enthusiasm, and I have all of the Affinity products in hopes of improvement, but it is almost as if the company has given up on addressing fairly basic stuff. I simply do not understand the apparent complacency.
I would like to hear from the company rather than someone who is apparently content with a lesser product than was replaced. There are good points about AP, but they need to be extended.

Though this is slightly off-topic, it is already possible by using the Pinning options. 😀

Pinned.mov

@garrettm30 @Seneca @Patrick Connor
Is it just me or are endnotes just a quasi-clone of a TOC? The only difference: you would set an anchor in the text (already possible), which gets converted to a glyph (shouldn't be difficult), and a dialog box opening to add the respective end-note text. The rest is exactly the same process as the TOC. You'd either insert it or create a new text frame at the end that. And once that block has been created, you can, if need be, still do some style editing.
Whaddaya think?

I'll also add my vote for Autotrace. I do use CorelDraw but felt that supporting the Affinity team with their excellent 50% off was necessary.

I'll also add my vote for Autotrace. I do use CorelDraw but felt that supporting the Affinity team with their excellent 50% off was necessary.

I'll also add my vote for Autotrace. I do use CorelDraw but felt that supporting the Affinity team with their excellent 50% off was necessary.

I find all these ideas very interesting and highly thought provoking. @A_B_C, I must congratulate you on some highly imaginative forward thinking.
But if I can just interject with a thought: of all the different styles of 'notes', I would think that endnotes are the easiest to achieve as it entails placing a single block of 'notes' at a specific place in the document, i.e. end of chapter or end of book. This, from a personal point of view, would satisfy me and probably many other book publishers, so would it be worth Serif progressing this feature to completion prior to all the other different types?